No, The Federal Budget is Not Like Your Household Budget

A seductive form of idiocy has been circulating on Facebook, purporting to clarify the federal budget by removing some zeros and couching it in terms of a family budget. Ahhh, now it comes clear – we have a deficit, and if my household had such a deficit, I would be in trouble.

No. Simply no. Don’t fall for this.

Don’t post this and encourage your friends to join you in your “common sense” understanding.

To put the silly analogy on the defense, how does it apply if a newly emancipated 18 year-old is considering taking out a student loan to launch a career? How does it apply if a family member has a heart attack, and the family doesn’t have the cash on hand to pay for a doctor that day? Why does this family insist on spending such a huge percentage of its budget on guns? This family would be just fine if it got along with its neighbors better . . .

This entry was posted
on Thursday, January 26th, 2012 at 7:49 AM and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

12 Responses to “No, The Federal Budget is Not Like Your Household Budget”

Nice. One of the top seductive idiocies out there. I also like the “we’re just like Greece!!!” version, where the similarities are just like the household budget–nonexistent. The one seductive idiocy that may bear thought is comparing gov’t. to running a business, at least if you look at the Mittster’s tenure at Bain–rack up unsupportable debt, sell off/privatize the good bits and walk away. The republican dream; well, substitute “play third world dictator with the remainder” for “walk away.”

Where do I start Dan? While it is true that comparing the Federal budget to a family budget is oversimplification, there is no economic theory that says consistently spending 45% more than you take in is a good long term strategy. And while it is true that the Feds can just print their own money, it sure doesn’t mean that they should. And the twit that you linked to in order to rebutt this? He compares 9/11 to a broken window from a thrown rock. You try to rebutt something that is slightly mislesding with a completely idiotic, clueless rant.

Dan, every politician in D.C. is advocating long term, consistent, unsustainable deficit spending. Not by their words, but by their actions.
And what I meant is that the Fed shouldn’t use the power of printing money as a tool to control the economy.

every politician in D.C. is advocating long term, consistent, unsustainable deficit spending.

Citation needed. I get that we’re seeing the results of a massive failure of the US education system; argument by assertion, straw man argument (as so ably demonstrated in your initial post), by assuming false premises, the notion that facts are less important than beliefs; voting against self interest based on unexamined catch phrases.
But are you also memory impaired? A decade ago–not so long, really, for a functional human memory to work–we had a balanced federal budget. Many, if not most, of the “every politician in D.C.” you claim to speak for were in govt. then, voting for the policies that created that surplus.
“…printing money as a tool to control the economy.” Are you living in the same world as the rest of us? Next you’ll tell us “Oh Woe, we’re just like Greece!!” You’re right–the Fed shouldn’t do that–fucking duh. But, there’s no shred of evidence that the Fed, is, will, or even can do that.